:: Maybe you even have some points here, yes. But we've initially discussed about this already: MediaWiki is flat, but we need a more structured approach. Using categories is simply not enough for adding a structure. Or let me put it in different words: Everyone usually uses the subpage-structure for new content. And it works really well so far. That's also how it works on UserBase, at least to some degree. It does not help if we change this approach now, a year too late. I think there are other valid reasons to use the subpages (e.g. you can write scripts that export the content into a real structure with parent-child relation, would help to migrate to e.g. another wiki). So basically it works for everyone. Before we change this now let's discuss this on kde-www. I for once think it's counterproductive to introduce random other concepts. --[[User:Dhaumann|Dhaumann]] 00:39, 25 September 2008 (CEST)

:: Maybe you even have some points here, yes. But we've initially discussed about this already: MediaWiki is flat, but we need a more structured approach. Using categories is simply not enough for adding a structure. Or let me put it in different words: Everyone usually uses the subpage-structure for new content. And it works really well so far. That's also how it works on UserBase, at least to some degree. It does not help if we change this approach now, a year too late. I think there are other valid reasons to use the subpages (e.g. you can write scripts that export the content into a real structure with parent-child relation, would help to migrate to e.g. another wiki). So basically it works for everyone. Before we change this now let's discuss this on kde-www. I for once think it's counterproductive to introduce random other concepts. --[[User:Dhaumann|Dhaumann]] 00:39, 25 September 2008 (CEST)

Revision as of 07:26, 26 September 2008

Please use subpages on techbase, also for tutorials like kioslaves. Thanks. --Dhaumann 00:00, 24 September 2008 (CEST)

I regard this as counter-productive. Here is why: You can change a work like a diploma thesis or a wiki from one structure to the other. Changing the structure means you change the headings and by this, you provide a difference cognitive approach to the topic. E.g. at the moment we have:

KDE

tutorials

kioslaves

We could also have

KDE

kioslaves

tutorial

Having the structure in the name would mean you have to change every article name if you want to change the structure. Even worse, there may be different structures in one wiki. Imagine someone writing a second main page named "KDE by technologies". One sub-topic would be kioslaves. The breathtaking strength of a mediawiki is that every article can define a structure on its own, the only given structure being the categories. Having said this, I never find my articles after they got moved - just because other people have a structure in mind that is different from mine. I can give my articles names that fit into this wiki's structure but I would find it sad. --Tstaerk 14:08, 24 September 2008 (CEST)

Maybe you even have some points here, yes. But we've initially discussed about this already: MediaWiki is flat, but we need a more structured approach. Using categories is simply not enough for adding a structure. Or let me put it in different words: Everyone usually uses the subpage-structure for new content. And it works really well so far. That's also how it works on UserBase, at least to some degree. It does not help if we change this approach now, a year too late. I think there are other valid reasons to use the subpages (e.g. you can write scripts that export the content into a real structure with parent-child relation, would help to migrate to e.g. another wiki). So basically it works for everyone. Before we change this now let's discuss this on kde-www. I for once think it's counterproductive to introduce random other concepts. --Dhaumann 00:39, 25 September 2008 (CEST)